I understand Part 15 (as well as Part 97, since I'm licensed under those rules). The mechanisms mentioned in the GP _do_ exist in law for 5GHz U-NII (read WiFi) systems. Please refer to Title 47 Part 15, Subpart E, particularly 15.407(h)(1) and (2) and also 15.37(e).

Also, (if I read it correctly) 15.37(h) forbids the marketing or sale of devices that use any digital modulation technique other than Spread Spectrum operating in the 5725-5850 MHz bands starting on June 2, 2016.

The definition of "digital modulation" is distinct from SS - from 15.403(f):

(f) Digital modulation. The process by which the characteristics of a carrier wave are varied among a set of predetermined discrete values in accordance with a digital modulating function as specified in document ANSI C63.17-1998.

with 2.5 Watts I can talk to 30 people around the globe using PSK31 or Wspr.

I've got that record beat at least on WSPR. I xmitted on 30m using 100mW from central VA (grid FM17), and was heard in New Zealand. An amazing mode, isn't it?

You're incorrect. Part 15 devices are absolutely required to not cause interference. From the link, emphasis mine:

Maybe she's trying to tell you to buy her a cordless vacuum.

My favorite was the coworker that set up a UPS on a server and left for the day. I got a call an hour later saying the server had stopped responding. It turns out that the coworker plugged the UPS INTO ITSELF, and left it running. From that day on his nickname was 'loopback'.

I always post to the wrong duplicate article! ~sarcasm

From my other post:

According to line 'A' on this graph, the atmospheric absorption at 95-100 GHz is fairly low, but this graph shows that rainfade is an absolute killer. Light rain contributes 1 dB/km, which amounts to losing 20.6% of your signal per km. After 10km, you're under 1% of your original signal.

Somewhere between medium and heavy rain you cross the 10 dB/km line - you lose 90% of your signal per km. That ventures into 'unusable' territory very quickly.

In a world where several BILLION up-and-coming wage earners are ripe to purchase their products, which, incidentally, wouldn't exist if not for the cheap labor still extant in that very same country.

According to line 'A' on this graph, the atmospheric absorption at 95-100 GHz is fairly low, but this graph shows that rainfade is an absolute killer. Light rain contributes 1 dB/km, which amounts to losing 20.6% of your signal per km. After 10km, you're under 1% of your original signal.

Somewhere between medium and heavy rain you cross the 10 dB/km line - you lose 90% of your signal per km. That ventures into 'unusable' territory very quickly.

Why you link an article about hypothetical nano technology is bejond me :)

Because it's fascinating, and it mentions the extreme energy density of other 'safe' radionuclides besides Plutonium 238. That was the question that was asked in the parent post, after all. :-)

As for efficiency, I bet a closed-cycle Stirling Engine system could work on Mars with Gd148 as the heat source and a radiative heat sink to space or the (almost non-existent) Mars atmosphere as the sink. Naturally you could parallel the Gd148 sources so that no one source exceeded the max temp for the engine. If you're not willing to do that, there are other non-moving solutions that beat the paltry 3-7% of an RTG.

I remember seeing that dish when I worked at Concurrent Computer in nearby Oceanport. I also volunteered at Ft. Monmouth during the 1st Gulf war operating their Army MARS station AAR2USI providing comms between deployed soldiers and their families stateside.

... IMHO is to walk away before you lose you marbles tilting at windmills.

You assume RTG technology - I don't and I don't think the linked article does, either.

They discuss Energy Organs here, stating that (emphasis mine):

I'd say that's pretty good efficiency, and given the power levels and temperatures, I think non-RTG technologies should be used. If the system never drops below 0C, why not use a more conventional system?

Plus, you could just use the Gd148 to keep the craft warm and use other means to generate electrical power.

Gd148 is sexy as hell, but isn't exactly available in the corner drugstore. I quote:

Yes, I admit it.

I stopped using TurboTax when they decided they could write data outside my filesystem, as if it were their computer. I use H&R Block's TaxCut, and it's just as good as TurboTax ever was.